A squall blew through several Prevention Action articles last week. David Olds cast doubts over the validity of methods used in the evaluation of the Chicago-Parent Center study and its impact on outcomes. Ogden and Henggeler questioned the findings in a Cochrane review of MST. Researchers in Durham have expressed doubts about the value of Sure Start, but using methods that fall short of the standard that Olds was calling for.

(See: Chicago Child-Parent Center study celebrates coming of age
Durham study casts more doubt on Sure Start
$14m for UK pilots of Multisystemic Therapy Services Inc.)

So what is a policy maker to do? Comparatively few programs have been shown to work using the highest standards of evaluation. The Blueprints for Violence Prevention database lists just 11 'model' programs evaluated by experimental design that have had a sustained impact on children's development and been replicated across several sites.

And even in the US where most of them originate there is comparatively little investment even in these 11 'gold standard' programs.

In his editorial on the Chicago Child-Parent Centers, Olds called for a replication in early years policy and research of the kind of scrutiny that has transformed the treatment of childhood leukemia. The first experiments with treatment began 50 years ago. The pioneers of the experimental approach prevailed, and today 80% to 90% of victims survive.